| Abstract | A member of Hongkong U's community medicine department, Lam Tai-hing, was given two hearings on charges of stealing the work of colleagues Linda Koo Chihling and John Ho Hung-chiu and found guilty twice. A year and a half later, a panel of university insiders finds that Lam isn't really a plagiarist and can keep his job. Certainly, Hongkong U is to be encouraged in its effort to get an ethics committee going. But let it be stacked with outsiders - not just insiders whose careers risk being reshaped in the shadow of committee decisions. Had it put outsiders on the Lam panel, he might well have been exonerated, at least in the university's eye - and the farce might have been minimised. |
|---|
